“From birth it is clear to him that this narrow world, strewn with prohibitions, can only be called in question by absolute violence.”

Source: The Wretched of the Earth (1961), p. 37.

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "From birth it is clear to him that this narrow world, strewn with prohibitions, can only be called in question by absol…" by Frantz Fanon?
Frantz Fanon photo
Frantz Fanon 46
Martiniquais writer, psychiatrist, philosopher, revolutiona… 1925–1961

Related quotes

“The first note was clear and absolutely certain. There was no question or stumbling in this bugle.”

Robert E. Lee Prewitt playing Taps
From Here to Eternity (1951)
Context: He looked at his watch and as the second hand touched the top stepped up and raised the bugle to the megaphone, and the nervousness dropped from him like a discarded blouse, and he was suddenly alone, gone away from the rest of them.
The first note was clear and absolutely certain. There was no question or stumbling in this bugle. It swept across the quadrangle positively, held just a fraction longer than most buglers hold it. Held long like the length of time, stretching away from weary day to weary day. Held long like thirty years. The second note was short, almost too abrupt. Cut short and soon gone, like the minutes with a whore. Short like a ten minute break is short. And then the last note of the first phrase rose triumphantly from the slightly broken rhythm, triumphantly high on an untouchable level of pride above the humiliations, the degradations.
He played it all that way, with a paused then hurried rhythm that no metronome could follow. There was no placid regimented tempo to Taps. The notes rose high in the air and hung above the quadrangle. They vibrated there, caressingly, filled with an infinite sadness, an endless patience, a pointless pride, the requiem and epitaph of the common soldier, who smelled like a common soldier, as a woman had once told him. They hovered like halos over the heads of sleeping men in the darkened barracks, turning all the grossness to the beauty that is the beauty of sympathy and understanding. Here we are, they said, you made us, now see us, dont close your eyes and shudder at it; this beauty, and this sorrow, of things as they are.

Lysander Spooner photo

“If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible one? or a limited and responsible one?”

Source: No Treason (1867–1870), No. VI: The Constitution of No Authority, p. 24; the first sentence here is widely paraphrased as: A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
Context: A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible.
The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily implying the other. Neither can exist without the other. If, therefore, Congress have that absolute and irresponsible lawmaking power, which the Constitution — according to their interpretation of it — gives them, it can only be because they own us as property. If they own us as property, they are our masters, and their will is our law. If they do not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us.
But these men who claim and exercise this absolute and irresponsible dominion over us, dare not be consistent, and claim either to be our masters, or to own us as property. They say they are only our servants, agents, attorneys, and representatives. But this declaration involves an absurdity, a contradiction. No man can be my servant, agent, attorney, or representative, and be, at the same time, uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me for his acts. It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible one? or a limited and responsible one?

Wilhelm Wundt photo

“We call that psychical process, which is operative in the clear perception of a narrow region of the content of consciousness, attention.”

Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920) German physician, physiologist, philosopher and professor

Source: An Introduction to Psychology (1912), p. 16

Gustav Landauer photo

“Now it can become clear to man that freedom and peace of the nations can only come when as Jesus and his followers, and in our time above all Tolstoi advised, they choose to fully abstain from any violence.”

Gustav Landauer (1870–1919) German anarchist

Letter from Landauer to Martin Buber 1914, quoted in Martin Buber's Life and Work, vol. I by M. Friedman 1981, pp. 251-252

Natalie Clifford Barney photo

“Youth is not a question of years: one is young or old from birth.”

Natalie Clifford Barney (1876–1972) writer and salonist

In "Samples from Almost Illegible Notebooks", ADAM International Review, No. 299 (1962)

Heraclitus photo

“Change he called a pathway up and down, and this determines the birth of the world.”

Heraclitus (-535) pre-Socratic Greek philosopher

From Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laërtius, Book IX, section 8

Haruki Murakami photo
Ravi Zacharias photo

“Then he said something that was absolutely defining for him: "Write this down and never forget it: Love is as much a question of the will as it is of the emotion. And if you will to love somebody, you can."”

Ravi Zacharias (1946) Indian philosopher

[I, Isaac, Take Thee, Rebekah: Moving from Romance to Lasting Love, 2005, 9781418515812, http://books.google.com/books?id=lhWCB2v3UlQC&pg=PA29&dq=%22Love+is+as+much+a+question+of+the+will%22, 29]
quoting his brother
2000s

George Santayana photo

“Injustice in this world is not something comparative; the wrong is deep, clear, and absolute in each private fate.”

George Santayana (1863–1952) 20th-century Spanish-American philosopher associated with Pragmatism

Source: The Life of Reason: The Phases of Human Progress (1905-1906), Vol. II, Reason in Society, Ch. IV: The Aristocratic Ideal

Related topics